Impact of simultaneous glutamate dehydrogenase and toxin A/B rapid immunoassay on Clostridium difficile diagnosis and treatment in hospitalized patients with antibiotic-associated diarrhea in a university hospital of Brazil

2018 ◽  
Vol 33 (2) ◽  
pp. 393-396 ◽  
Author(s):  
Guilherme Grossi Lopes Cançado ◽  
Rodrigo Otávio Silveira Silva ◽  
Amanda Pontes Nader ◽  
Francisco Carlos Faria Lobato ◽  
Eduardo Garcia Vilela
Anaerobe ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 54 ◽  
pp. 65-71 ◽  
Author(s):  
Guilherme Grossi Lopes Cançado ◽  
Rodrigo Otávio Silveira Silva ◽  
Maja Rupnik ◽  
Amanda Pontes Nader ◽  
Joana Starling de Carvalho ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 51 (3) ◽  
pp. 1139-1143
Author(s):  
Carolina Pantuzza Ramos ◽  
Emily Oliveira Lopes ◽  
Amanda Nádia Diniz ◽  
Francisco Carlos Faria Lobato ◽  
Eduardo Garcia Vilela ◽  
...  

2007 ◽  
Vol 28 (4) ◽  
pp. 377-381 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nir Peled ◽  
Silvio Pitlik ◽  
Zmira Samra ◽  
Arkadi Kazakov ◽  
Yoram Bloch ◽  
...  

Objective.Clostridium difficile infection is implicated in 20%-30% of cases of antibiotic-associated diarrhea. Studying hospitalized patients who received antibiotic therapy and developed diarrhea, our objective was to compare the clinical characteristics of patients who developed C. difficile–associated diarrhea (CDAD) with those of patients with a negative result of a stool assay for C. difficile toxin.Methods.A prospective study was done with a cohort of 217 hospitalized patients who had received antibiotics and developed diarrhea. Patients with CDAD were defined as patients who had diarrhea and a positive result for C. difficile toxin A/B by an enzyme immunoassay of stool. The variables that yielded a significant difference on univariate analysis between patients with a positive assay result and patients with a negative assay result were entered into a logistic regression model for prediction of C. difficile toxin.Setting.A 900-bed tertiary care medical center.Results.Of 217 patients, 52 (24%) had a positive result of assay for C. difficile toxin A/B in their stool. The logistic regression model included impaired functional capacity, watery diarrhea, use of a proton pump inhibitor, use of a histamine receptor blocker, leukocytosis, and hypoalbuminemia. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for the model as a predictor of a positive result for the stool toxin assay was 0.896 (95% confidence interval, 0.661-1.000; P<.001), with 95% specificity and 68% sensitivity.Conclusions.Our results may help clinicians to predict the risk of CDAD in hospitalized patients with antibiotic-associated diarrhea, to guide careful, specific empirical therapy, and to direct early attention to infection control issues.


2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (Supplement_2) ◽  
pp. S836-S837
Author(s):  
Khanh-Linh Le ◽  
Heather Young ◽  
Timothy C Jenkins ◽  
Robert Tapia ◽  
Katherine C Shihadeh

Abstract Background Prior to 2016, Denver Health Medical Center had a higher-than-expected rate of hospital onset Clostridium difficile infection (HO-CDI). A multifaceted CDI prevention plan was implemented, including the use of a probiotic as primary prevention for HO-CDI and antibiotic-associated diarrhea (AAD) in inpatients receiving broad-spectrum antibiotics. We aimed to study the effectiveness of probiotic use in this clinical context. Methods During the intervention, inpatient orders for a broad-spectrum antibiotic triggered a best practice advisory recommending once daily co-administration of 100 billion units of a probiotic containing Lactobacillus casei, L. rhamnosus, and L. acidophilus (BioK+ ®). To evaluate effectiveness and safety of this intervention, we performed a retrospective cohort study including adult inpatients who received > 24 hours of a broad-spectrum antibiotic between April 2016 and March 2018. The primary endpoint was the incidence of HO-CDI (> 3 days after admission) compared between patients who received antibiotics alone vs. antibiotics plus the probiotic. Secondary endpoints were the incidence of AAD, defined as a negative CDI test after antibiotic initiation, and the incidence of Lactobacillus species identified in clinical cultures. Results 3,291 patients were included; 1,835 received antibiotics alone and 1,456 received antibiotics plus the probiotic. Baseline characteristics between groups were similar, except patients in the antibiotic alone group had a greater incidence of cirrhosis and proton-pump inhibitor use (16.1% vs 10.1%, P < 0.001; 39.1% vs 31.5%, P < 0.001). Length of stay and antibiotic days of therapy were longer in the antibiotic plus probiotic group [6 days (IQR, 3–11) vs 6 days (IQR, 4–12), P = 0.014; 4 days (IQR, 3–7) vs 5 days (IQR, 3–7), P < 0.001]. The incidence of HO-CDI (37, 2% vs 35, 2.4%; P = 0.450) and AAD (231, 12.6% vs 199, 13.7%; P = 0.362) were similar between groups. Lactobacillus was identified in at least one clinical culture from 0.2% (3/1835) and 0.3% (4/1456) of patients in the antibiotic alone group and antibiotic plus probiotic group, respectively (P = 0.497). Conclusion In hospitalized patients receiving broad-spectrum antibiotics, co-administration of a probiotic did not appear to reduce the incidence of HO-CDI or AAD. Disclosures All authors: No reported disclosures.


2015 ◽  
Vol 30 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Massimo Oggioni ◽  
Alessandra Bielli ◽  
Alice Nava ◽  
Daniela Adele Pia Campisi

The presumptive laboratory diagnosis of <em>Clostridium</em> <em>difficile</em> infection is achieved by the means of the detection of a common antigen (glutamate dehydrogenase, GDH) in stool, then confirming the positives either by the detection of toxins A and B or by a molecular test for the detection of pathogenicity <em>locus</em>, encoding for the two toxins and for the binary toxin. A fully automated chemiluminescence system for the GDH antigen (LIAISON® C. difficile GDH) and for the detection of toxins A and B (LIAISON® C. difficile Toxin A and B) (DiaSorin, Gerenzano, Italy) allows for the performance of these tests on large numbers of samples in a short time, ensuring the traceability of the data.


2003 ◽  
Vol 9 (8) ◽  
pp. 903-904 ◽  
Author(s):  
H. Pituch ◽  
A. van Belkum ◽  
N. van den Braak ◽  
P. Obuch-Woszczatyñski ◽  
A. Sawicka-Grzelak ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document